I don't think you can compare our franchise to those. They've had success, they had vets, who knew how to be vets. If you put Kubiak on any of those teams when those coaches took over, no doubt in my mind they would have had as much success if not more.

We didn't have anything. What we did get in the expansion draft, Capers & Casserly pretty much dumped before the 2-14 season.

Compare this club to the Detroit Lions of 2002, the 49ers of 2002, the Cardinals of 2002. & what we've got here isn't very much different.

The Cardinals of course seems to be the best franchise of that bunch. Denny Green IMHO left a much better team for Wisenhunt than Capers left for Casserly. I don't know that Green couldn't have taken the team Wisenhunt took to the Super Bowl. I think Green was let go to early & that team would look better now, if Green was still there. Wisenhunt (IMHO) isn't as good as putting a team together (at least he hasn't shown it) than Green was.

That's the fear I have, of losing Kubiak. This team is good enough (IMHO) to get to the play-offs & make a strong push for the Super Bowl. Looks mediocre now, I know.... we're dealing with adversity (everybody does, every season) we're getting ours now, & I think it'll all work out in the end. We'll make a Super Bowl push & I like Kubiak & Smith keeping that going next year, and the year after, and the year after.

I liked what Marinelli was able to do in Detroit. I don't agree with his firing. But they've been messing around with coaches while keeping a bad GM & they hadn't been able to build the foundation a franchise needs until Marinelli got there. I like what Shwartz is doing there. I think he put together a good draft, had a great offseason & I think he will do well if they allow him the time to finish.

I liked what Mike Nolan was doing in San Francisco but they fired him too early (expectations too high). I like Singletary, I think he would have had more success taking over a more veteran team. If he gets fired in San Fran because of what they are going through now (which I don't think they would be going through with Nolan) he may not get a chance to be a head coach again.

This is our 9th season. The most success we've had in the last 9 years, is a 9-7 season. It doesn't make sense to compare Kubiak to Ryan who took over a 9-7 team with pro bowl guards & a history & tradition we can't even compare....

Or an Atlanta Falcons team that had been to the NFC championship game in that 9 year period. Or a Miami team with a top 10 defense.

Thunderkyss,

If, somehow, they finish with 10 wins and make the playoffs... even 9 and the playoffs (not gonna happen), I'll go with you down this line of thinking. But, 5 years of unfettered opportunity to build the team, get the talent and coaches in place... he has to cash that in. If, after five years they can't accomplish one 10 win season, then either they are acquiring the wrong talent, aren't developing the talent well, are unable to scheme to win, or are making other costly decisions detrimental to the franchise. Last year, I believed Kubiak deserved one last season, with his guys, to prove whether or not he could do it. So far, I'm thoroughly disappointed.

The 2-14 Texans were essentially the same team that went 7-9 the
year before. That 2-14 talent was good enough to go 7-9. Kubiak
took the 2-14 team to 6-10. They have not improved from mediocre
since. The Saints' 3-13 situation is NOT dissimilar from the Texans 2-14
situation. They only have 2 NFC Championship Games and a Superbowl
to speak for it.

So, do we stick with a coach that can take a bad team to mediocre, and
not improve from that caliber in spite of the talent increasing every year?

The talent level a new coach would have to start at, is not the same as
2006. Should Kubiak continue his trend of .500 ball, we know what we
have in him. It ain't enough.

Kubiak does not want to hurt Kareem Jackson's feelings, even if every
team gets 2 free touchdowns on him every week. When we are leading
a game via smashmouth, Kubiak can't wait to show how smart he is
with his passing schematics, even if it ultimately gets us beat. He had
a prime opportunity to hire a reputable defensive coordinator, and Gary
chose the "love conquers all" option and REFUSED to interview ANYBODY
for the DC position OTHER THAN Frank Bush.

Yes, they have the talent (sans some aspects on Defense) but Kubiak has had too long with no results. This season is not over yet, but seriously look at the schedule ahead. I mean for real, for real.... If we don't make playoffs this year and by your own admission of the talent we have...Kubes stays?!?!

I don't think you can compare our franchise to those. They've had success, they had vets, who knew how to be vets. If you put Kubiak on any of those teams when those coaches took over, no doubt in my mind they would have had as much success if not more.

We didn't have anything. What we did get in the expansion draft, Capers & Casserly pretty much dumped before the 2-14 season.

Compare this club to the Detroit Lions of 2002, the 49ers of 2002, the Cardinals of 2002. & what we've got here isn't very much different.

The Cardinals of course seems to be the best franchise of that bunch. Denny Green IMHO left a much better team for Wisenhunt than Capers left for Casserly. I don't know that Green couldn't have taken the team Wisenhunt took to the Super Bowl. I think Green was let go to early & that team would look better now, if Green was still there. Wisenhunt (IMHO) isn't as good as putting a team together (at least he hasn't shown it) than Green was.

That's the fear I have, of losing Kubiak. This team is good enough (IMHO) to get to the play-offs & make a strong push for the Super Bowl. Looks mediocre now, I know.... we're dealing with adversity (everybody does, every season) we're getting ours now, & I think it'll all work out in the end. We'll make a Super Bowl push & I like Kubiak & Smith keeping that going next year, and the year after, and the year after.

I liked what Marinelli was able to do in Detroit. I don't agree with his firing. But they've been messing around with coaches while keeping a bad GM & they hadn't been able to build the foundation a franchise needs until Marinelli got there. I like what Shwartz is doing there. I think he put together a good draft, had a great offseason & I think he will do well if they allow him the time to finish.
I liked what Mike Nolan was doing in San Francisco but they fired him too early (expectations too high). I like Singletary, I think he would have had more success taking over a more veteran team. If he gets fired in San Fran because of what they are going through now (which I don't think they would be going through with Nolan) he may not get a chance to be a head coach again.

This is our 9th season. The most success we've had in the last 9 years, is a 9-7 season. It doesn't make sense to compare Kubiak to Ryan who took over a 9-7 team with pro bowl guards & a history & tradition we can't even compare....

Or an Atlanta Falcons team that had been to the NFC championship game in that 9 year period. Or a Miami team with a top 10 defense.

Hold it, Hold it.

Thunder, you don't agree with firing Marinelli? You think it's ok that he went 0-16?

Bill, Yes things could go south. That is a possibility with upheaval. That is why I was reluctant last season. However, as easily as you can come up with those failed examples, I could list coaching changes that had an immediately positive effect. So, that is a pretty poor argument for not making a change. Though, to the point that a change shouldn't happen without a well thought out plan for a replacement in place, I agree.

Also, my reversal of field regarding Kubiak has less to do with the team's lack of improvement than it does with the realization that it has significantly regressed.

I liked what Marinelli was able to do in Detroit. I don't agree with his firing. But they've been messing around with coaches while keeping a bad GM & they hadn't been able to build the foundation a franchise needs until Marinelli got there. I like what Shwartz is doing there. I think he put together a good draft, had a great offseason & I think he will do well if they allow him the time to finish.

How long does it take for a coach to "finish" the job, TK? This question has nothing to do with Schwartz or Kubiak.

How many years of .500 type of football do you think is too many before you fire a head coach?

In my opinion, if you haven't gotten it done (atleast the playoffs) after four years you need to be examined very closely.

It was a toss up last year. Kubiak's new DC, the guy he wanted all along, had improved the defense and found a way to find new play-makers (Cushing, Pollard, Smith). The problem was that the defense was unable to be consistent, they started the season off giving up 24 points a game and heavily contributing to a 2-3 start.

The offense was atrocious in the run game, but yet had a passing game that could move the ball extremely well. The offense was rarely able to score as many points as it should have, mainly due to their issues running the ball. On top of that, the defense wasn't always helping the offense out, giving up 20 or more points in 4 of our 9 wins.

I understood why they kept Kubiak for one more year. The team didn't have the 'finished' or 'together' feel to it, but it looked like it was coming along pretty well. The offense, while unbalanced, was again amongst the best in the league in yardage, and the defense was improving enough that there was some belief in the coaching. While I was not completely confident in Kubiak, I was ok to watch him have one more go 'round at it.

This year it's completely different for me already. The defense is close to, if not the worst defense I have ever seen. We are letting people both move the ball for first downs and score on us like it's part of the gameplan. Our offense is finally starting to show some balance. Our running game is off the charts compared to anything we have ever had under the Kubiak era. The passing game, while down from a year ago, is still effective despite the injuries to Andre Johnson/OD and the poor pass blocking. But despite this balance, we still have to deal with Kubiak and his oddly timed playcalls and forgetfulness (Arian who?).

I have seen enough. I guess 5 years is where I really, truly draw my line.

If, somehow, they finish with 10 wins and make the playoffs... even 9 and the playoffs (not gonna happen), I'll go with you down this line of thinking. But, 5 years of unfettered opportunity to build the team, get the talent and coaches in place... he has to cash that in. If, after five years they can't accomplish one 10 win season, then either they are acquiring the wrong talent, aren't developing the talent well, are unable to scheme to win, or are making other costly decisions detrimental to the franchise. Last year, I believed Kubiak deserved one last season, with his guys, to prove whether or not he could do it. So far, I'm thoroughly disappointed.

I've never said any different. If he got this thing turned around in 3 years I think he would have done an amazing job. If he did it in 4, good job. If he does it in 5...meah.... not bad.

But if he can't do it in 5, he can't do it.

I wouldn't say I'm thoroughly disappointed. There are reasons this team should be 2-6 right now. There are reasons this team should be 7-1. We're 4-4...... Not as good as it should be. Not as bad as it could be.

He's got everything set up against him (IMO) to have to do some damn good coaching to pull this off (6-2 over the next 8). If he's a damn good coach (& I think he is) he'll do it. If he's not, he won't.

Whether or not he'll be here next year isn't even a concern for me right now. I've got no control of that. The only preference that I have (that he stays) is conditional on how we finish this season.

The 2-14 Texans were essentially the same team that went 7-9 the
year before. That 2-14 talent was good enough to go 7-9. Kubiak
took the 2-14 team to 6-10. They have not improved from mediocre
since. The Saints' 3-13 situation is NOT dissimilar from the Texans 2-14
situation. They only have 2 NFC Championship Games and a Superbowl
to speak for it.

You're right, the situations are extremely similar.

Other than the fact that Haslett left a probowl running back, WR, tackle (& RG I think)... other than Peyton being allowed to get a pro-bowl corner back, other than Peyton not having to start half a dozen rookies out of necessity.......

Completely similar.

They also made the decision to invest in FAs...... we did not. Like it or not, McNair seems to be good with that decision, which mean to build primarily through the draft, which will naturally take longer.

Yes, they have the talent (sans some aspects on Defense) but Kubiak has had too long with no results. This season is not over yet, but seriously look at the schedule ahead. I mean for real, for real.... If we don't make playoffs this year and by your own admission of the talent we have...Kubes stays?!?!

You'll have to be more specific, I'm seeing results all over the place. Maybe not what you want to see, but the results are there, and some of it is good.

Thunder, you don't agree with firing Marinelli? You think it's ok that he went 0-16?

Dude, I have heard everything. I have no freaking words.

No offense, but the more you talk, the more you lose credibility.

I think it's ridiculous to look at a team like Detroit with everything they went through that season (Orlovsky started what 7 games??) & look at their W-L record as the final end all be all results of that season.

Sure that's all that counts in the NFL.

But how many games did you expect them to win? 4?? So for 12 games of the season, they did exactly what you expected them to, & failed to win the 4 games someone penciled in....... really?

3 years ago I took over coaching my 8U softball team. Some of the girls had just moved up from 6U some of the girls had never swung a bat or ran a base in their lives. We played all the teams in this area, & the only game we won, was the game against a team in a similar situation, & it's not like we blew them out.

The parents were disappointed, the girls were disappointed. I told them they had no reason to be. Their girls did an excellent job, they played hard, they learned the game, & they were much better at the end of the season than they were when the season started. Some girls didn't come back.

We had a losing record the next year. Same thing, same disappointment, same speech. Some girls didn't come back.

our third year, we were undefeated in our league & won 1st or second place in 6 local tournaments & placed in the top 25 at the state tournament.

Now, everybody wants to be on our team when we move up to 10U.... I told this years parents, the ones that stuck with us since we moved up to 8U to expect the same thing going to the next level.

Kubiak is not saying this but I think he realizes he made a mistake taking out Foster when Foster did not ask to be taken out in the 3rd q in the red zone.(Or at least I hope so) Then again he COULD be like Carr who said i never really thought about how many TOs I have or that they hurt the team. Just never considered it. Kubiak is a nice guy, but I could see him getting completely outsmarted when he was a kid. Why because I can see him as an adult completeing getting outsmarted every week. Could it be that he doesn't understand completely that details matter. Could it be that he doesn't umderstand that one play can make a difference. How else can you explain him taking out Foster in the red zone in a must win game. And that was a must win game guys whether you realize it or not. I think when he is finally let go, sooner I hope than later, but I am afraid much later, he will say that one of his mistakes was not having a sense of URGENCY to win every game. He tried to plan for the future not understanding that the only thing that mattered was to win every week. He just doesn't seem to get IT. The future will take care of itself if you do everything you can do all the time to win NOW.

I don't like Wisenhunt. I think he took a team that was on the upswing, & he's got them on a down cycle.

I don't like McDaniels.... even I'm saying WTF??

I don't know that we've seen Caldwell coach yet... not that I don't like him, I just don't know.

I don't like Chan Gailey.... I think he was a yes man in Dallas, & let himself get fired for being a yes man. I like what's happening in Buffalo right now (very surprised).

I don't like Pete Carroll.... he's a fine coach, I just don't like him.

I'm not a big fan of Brad Childress... another fine coach, but maybe not a head coach.

Not a big fan of Andy Reid's.... a fine head coach, no doubt. I just think he didn't help McNabb grow as a player/leader. That IMO is the only reason they hadn't won a Super Bowl. McNabb is the same kid ("I don't want to be a leader") guy that he was when he came into the league. He's a big reason for a much of the success in Philladelphia, but if a Super Bowl Championship is the goal, all those NFC Championship games (in what I thought at the time was a weak NFC) doesn't really mean a whole lot.

How long does it take for a coach to "finish" the job, TK? This question has nothing to do with Schwartz or Kubiak.

How many years of .500 type of football do you think is too many before you fire a head coach?

Every situation is different.

If I've got a top 10 defense in place like Cable did with the Oakland Raiders, I wouldn't think it would take him 2 years to start playing respectable football. To me, that's 7-9 to 9-7.

The 2005 Texans 7-9 season doesn't count for me, because that team obviously was a 4-12 to 7-9 team.

Our first 8-8 year didn't mean anything more to me than that 7-9 season. The second 8-8 season told me that's where we were. A solid middle of the road team. 2008.... 2009, I think that was a 10 win team, we only won 9, could have won 11...

This year, I firmly believe we have a 10 win team. 9 games ain't going to cut it. Had he not come up short (in my mind) last year, maybe I'd give him credit for what he's dealing with now. Had he exceeded my expectations, got 11 wins or 12 wins last season, maybe a 9-7 or 8-8 season would be over looked right now (by me). But he didn't.

He underperformed the team (my opinion), the team he built in 2009, so he gets no excuses (I've never said any different for 2010).

It sucks for him that he had to draw this schedule this year. But to under-perform his team two years in a row shouldn't be acceptable.

Marinelli was putting together a good team. Shwartz appears to be continuing that. I don't follow the Lions as closely as the Texans, so I don't know how far along they really are. I don't know the leadership situation or the injury situation, or the age of the talent. So I can't say how long "finish" would be in that situation. But anything less than 4 full seasons can't be right. Meaning if they fire him after year 3 I would think that was a little early.

Firing Jauron after what 2 years in Buffalo?? I don't remember, but I don't think he even finished his second year.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TexansSeminole

In my opinion, if you haven't gotten it done (atleast the playoffs) after four years you need to be examined very closely.

This situation was different... I think McNair had a "do the right thing by my players" attitude that kept people on this roster, that Kubiak had to deal with. David Carr is only the most blatant one, & Kris Brown may have been one as well.

The QB thing is so important I don't have a problem giving Kubiak an extra year.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TexansSeminole

This year it's completely different for me already.

I have seen enough. I guess 5 years is where I really, truly draw my line.

Exactly...... for me it's different because this team is the team he wanted. He's got the Co-ordinators he wanted. & many of these guys (his guys) have been here 3 years or longer.

The only difference between me & the soapers, is that I'm willing to give him till the end of the year to prove what kind of coach he is. The soapers feel they have seen enough.